Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T13:24:31.065Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Evaluation of Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) in North Carolina, 2003-2010

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 January 2013

Jennifer Horney ,
Meredith K. Davis ,
Sarah E.H. Davis  and
Aaron Fleischauer
Jennifer Horney*
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina USA
Meredith K. Davis
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina USA
Sarah E.H. Davis
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina USA
Aaron Fleischauer
Affiliation:
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention – CEFO, North Carolina Division of Public Health, Raleigh, North Carolina USA
*
Correspondence: Jennifer Horney, PhD, MPH, CPH University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Gillings School of Global Public Health Campus Box 8165, 400 Roberson Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA E-mail [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction

Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) is a group of tools and methods designed by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to provide rapid, reliable, and accurate population-based public health information. Since 2003, North Carolina public health professionals have used CASPERs to facilitate public health emergency responses and gather information on other topics including routine community health assessments.

Problem

To date, there has been no evaluation of CASPER use by public health agencies at the state or local level in the US.

Methods

Local health departments of North Carolina reported when and how CASPERs were used during the period 2003 to 2010 via an online survey. Data on barriers and future plans for using CASPERs also were collected.

Results

Fifty-two of North Carolina's 85 local health departments (61%) completed the survey. Twenty-eight departments reported 46 instances of CASPER use during 2003 to 2010. The majority of CASPERs were performed for community health assessments (n = 20, 43%) or exercises (n = 11, 24%). Fifty-six percent of respondents indicated they were “likely” or “very likely” to use CASPERs in the future; those who had prior experience with CASPERs were significantly more likely (P = .02) to report planned future use of CASPERs compared to those without prior experience with the tool. Lack of training, equipment, and time were the most frequently reported barriers to using CASPERs.

Conclusions

Local public health agencies with clear objectives and goals can effectively use CASPERs in both routine public health practice and disaster settings.

HorneyJ, DavisMK, DavisSEH, FleischauerA. An Evaluation of Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) in North Carolina, 2003-2010. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2013;28(2):1–5.

Keywords

CASPERdisaster epidemiologyevaluation
Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 28 , Issue 2 , April 2013 , pp. 94 - 98
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CASPER Toolkit. http://www.bt.cdc.gov/disasters/surveillance/pdf/CASPER_toolkit_508%20COMPLIANT.pdf. Accessed August 16, 2010.Google Scholar
2.Zane, DF, Bayleyegn, TM, Haywood, TL, et al. Community assessment for public health emergency response following Hurricane Ike-Texas, 25-30 September 2008. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2010;25(6):503-510.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Henderson, RH, Sundaresan, T. Cluster sampling to assess immunization coverage: a review of experience with a simplified sampling methodology. B World Health Organ. 1982;60(2):253-260.Google Scholar
4.Malilay, J, Flanders, WD, Brogan, D. A modified cluster-sampling method for post disaster rapid assessment of needs. B World Health Organ. 1996;74(4):399-405.Google ScholarPubMed
5.Frerichs, RR, Shaheen, MA. Small community based surveys. Annu Rev Publ Health. 2001;(22):231-247.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Ewert, DP, Thomas, JC, Chun, LY, Enguidanos, RC, Waterman, SH. Measles vaccination coverage among Latino children aged 12 months to 59 months in Los Angeles County: a household survey. Am J Public Health. 1991;81:1057-1059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Goodman, K, Wu, JS, Frerichs, RR. Compliance with childhood immunizations in Kern County, California. J Immigrant Health. 2000;2(4):213-222.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Shaheen, M, Frerichs, RR, Alexopolous, N, Rainey, JJ. Immunization coverage among predominantly Hispanic children, aged 2-3 years in Central Los Angeles. Ann Epidemiol. 2000;10(3):160-168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Berg, B, Grievink, L, Gutschmidt, K, Lang, T, Palmer, S, et al. The public health dimension of disasters: health outcome assessment of disasters. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2008;23(2):S55-S59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Bennett, S, Radalowicz, A, Vella, V, Tompkins, A. A computer simulation of household sampling schemes for health surveys in developing countries. Int J Epidemiology. 1994;23:1282-1291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Lemeshow, S, Robinson, D. Surveys to measure programme coverage and impact: a review of the methodology used by the expanded programme on immunization. World Health Stat Q. 1985;38:65-75.Google ScholarPubMed
12.Henderson, RH, Sundaresan, T. Cluster sampling to assess immunization coverage: a review of experience with a simplified sampling methodology. B World Health Organ. 1982;60(2):253-260.Google Scholar
13.Bennett, S, Radalowicz, A, Vella, V, Tomkins, A. A Computer simulation of household sampling schemes for health surveys in developing countries. Int J Epidemiol. 1994;23(6):1282-1291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Fletcher, LA, Erickson, DJ, Toomey, TL, Wagenaar, AC. Handheld computers: a feasible alternative to paper forms for field data collection. Eval Rev. 2003;27(2):165-178.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Lal, SO, Smith, FW, Davis, JP, et al. Palm computer demonstrates fast and accurate means of burn data collection. J Burn Care Rehabil. 2000;21(6):559-561.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Pace, WD, Staton, EW. Electronic data collection options for practice based research networks. Ann Fam Med. 2005;3(Supp 1):S21-S29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Buck, DS, Rochon, D, Turley, JP. Taking it to the streets: recording medical outreach data on personal digital assistants. Comput Nurs. 2005;23(5):250-255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Greene, PD. Handheld computers as tools for writing and managing field data. Field Methods. 2001;1(2):181-197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.North Carolina Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response. Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response. http://www.epi.state.nc.us/epi/phpr/casper.html. Accessed August 16, 2010.Google Scholar
20.Horney, J, Ramsey, S, Smith, M, Johnson, M, MacDonald, PDM. Enhancing local health department preparedness in North Carolina with mobile GIS/GPS technology and training. J Emerg Management. 2011;9(5):47-55.Google Scholar
21.Horney, J, Snider, C, Gammons, L, Ramsey, S. Factors associated with hurricane preparedness: results of a pre-hurricane assessment. J Nat Disasters. 2008;3(2):143-149.Google Scholar
22.Horney, J, Moore, Z, Davis, M, MacDonald, PDM. Intent to receive pandemic influenza A (H1N1) vaccine, ability to comply with social distancing and sources of H1N1 information in North Carolina communities. PLoS One. 5(6). http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0011226. Published June 18, 2010. Accessed August 16, 2010.Google Scholar
23.Rosselli, R, Bevc, C, Simon, M, Casani, J, Horney, JA, MacDonald, PDM. Residential Household Knowledge and Receipt of Potassium Iodide within the 10-mile Emergency Planning Zone of a Nuclear Power Plant in North Carolina. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters. In press.Google Scholar